At times in Christian thought, the priorities of pure doctrine and passionate mission have been perceived as opposites on a spectrum where emphasis on one results in neglect of the other, but without one, the other is deficient and doomed to crumble. Mission without doctrine is like a body without a skeleton, but apart from mission, doctrine is like dry bones in a museum. A Lutheran Reformission maintains a dual emphasis, resulting in doctrinal missions as well as missional doctrine.

Monday, September 29, 2014

My article from this week's newspapers answers a question about Christians and Environmentalism:

Q: Can a Christian be an
environmentalist? What should be a
Christian approach to care of the environment?

Responsible care of creation is a
concern which should resonate with most Christians. From the beginning, the Bible’s account of
creation portrays man as the caretaker of creation. Even before sin entered the world, Adam was
tasked with the work of tending to the Garden in which the Lord had placed him,
and both creation and Adam’s care for it were very good in the eyes of
God.

Throughout Scripture, humans are
described as the stewards of the material blessings of the earth. A steward is one who does not own the things
he manages, but has been given authority by the owner to distribute and use
those things, but with the understanding that he is also to care for them
responsibly – since they are not his own, but belong to the master.

In this case, man is the steward, and
God is the master to whom it belongs. We
do not truly own any of the things that we possess or use in this world, but
instead, they belong to God Himself, and we are given the privilege to use them
for a time along with the obligation to care for them responsibly.

Even though commands in the book of
Genesis such as “be fruitful and multiply” or “fill the earth and subdue it”
are occasionally taken out of context to conclude that man can carelessly
consume the earth’s resources without limitation or concern for the
consequences, a proper reading of Scripture leads the Christian to take this
concept of stewardship to heart – that while we have the authority to consume
resources, advance society, and build upon the earth, both form comfort and
survival, we are not to do so carelessly.

While abuses have occurred in
history, be it out of selfish malice or simple ignorance, toward the earth’s
resources, the focus of modern environmental movements may be both an
overcorrection as well as a moral concern for Christians.

One reason for concern is the
connection of modern environmentalism to other spiritualities. Much of the activism that surrounds the
environment has foundations in philosophies and religions that are not only
foreign to Christianity, but are even in opposition to Christianity. For example, the Hindu earth goddess Gaia
played a significant role in early environmental activism, and much of the
underlying ideology of the environmental movement arises from an understanding of
the earth as “mother” that comes to us from Wiccan and other pagan
sources. Because of this, it is
important for the Christian to make sure it is science, and not assumptions
based on foreign spiritualities which are informing their concern.

Additionally, and of a more practical
concern, are the tendencies within some sectors of environmental activism to
portray humanity as the enemy of the created world. This flawed assumption directly contradicts
Biblical descriptions that man is the high point of God’s creation and the
divinely-appointed steward of nature and its resources. It also creates a worldview in which
children, particularly large families, are to be avoided and frowned upon as
burdens to the environment rather than understood as divine blessings to be
desired and received with thankfulness.

Ultimately, while responsible care
for the environment is absolutely consistent with the Lord’s commands to
humanity, it is necessary to use caution that we do not make the world or its
care into an idol which supplants the Lord who created it. At the same time, Christians should be at the
forefront of responsible environmental stewardship out of respect for the Lord
who created the world and appreciation toward Him who is the supreme source of
its many blessings.

Monday, September 15, 2014

My article from this week's newspapers responds to a question about excommunication:

Q: What is excommunication, and
what are the implications if a church has excommunicated a person?

Although the term excommunication
might initially evoke mental images that resemble an Amish shunning or a scene
from the Scarlet Letter, the reality is much less dramatic and much less common
than many might imagine.

Christians believe a person is saved
as a gift from God because of the crucifixion of Jesus for them. All who trust that this sacrifice forgives
their sins confess them – that is they agree with God’s law concerning their
actions – and receive God’s forgiveness.
This occurs privately between the person and God, as well as being
spoken corporately in the services of many types of churches, and in some
traditions also occurs privately between the person and his pastor or
priest.

While many sins are known only to the
sinner and to God, occasionally a sin becomes known to a person’s pastor or
their fellow Christians, who may need to confront them regarding that sin. When the person who has committed the sin
agrees with God’s law about his actions, he receives forgiveness. In such a case, his pastor and fellow
Christians would not have further concerns about his spiritual condition, even
though it may still be necessary to provide counsel and support to help him
overcome any inclinations to return to that particular sin.

However, when a member is confronted
with a sin and either denies its sinfulness or disregards its sinfulness,
concern about his spiritual condition quickly intensifies. In Matthew 18, Jesus instructs His disciples
that if the correction of one person does not convince the person they ought to
take along 2 or 3 people with authority in the church and confront him
again. If after this second intervention
the person still defends his sin, Jesus says to take the matter before the
whole church to plead with him, following which he is to be excluded as long as
he does not repent.

Paul instructs the Corinthians in his
first letter to them to do this regarding a particular man in their
congregation who is involved in an illicit intimate relationship with his
step-mother, saying to “Expel the evil person from among you.” But, contrary to what many first impressions
might be, this is not an effort to keep the congregation pure by removing
sinners. Instead, it is intended as a
method by which the unrepentant would be guided to recognize their sin. Paul makes this clear when he says, “you must
deliver this man over to Satan… that his spirit might be saved in the day of
the Lord.”

Similarly it is not done in order to
place condemnation onto the man, but rather to recognize the fact that he has
already separated himself from God’s forgiveness by refusing to acknowledge his
sin. Jesus reflects this same
understanding when He assigns His disciples the task of forgiving and
withholding sins in John 20, saying, “If you forgive the sins of any, they have
already been forgiven them; if you withhold forgiveness, it has already been
withheld.”

Many traditions prefer the term
Church Discipline rather than Excommunication to refer to this process, because
it emphasizes the intended result that the person be restored to the
congregation rather than the method that they are placed outside the church’s
fellowship. Correspondingly, a public
removal from the congregation is not the only form of church discipline.

Instead, on some occasions, a pastor
might privately exclude the individual from the Lord’s Supper in the
congregation because of the danger of doing spiritual harm to them, according
to Paul’s warnings in 1 Corinthians 10-11 against receiving Communion while
unrepentant. On some occasions, this is
a first step before formal removal from the congregation, but frequently it
results in the restoration of the person to a repentant and forgiven status
without proceeding to bring them before the congregation for removal.

Regardless of the procedure by which
this is achieved, the goal is the same – restoration of the sinner to the
reception of the Lord’s forgiveness.
While such a practice might appear intolerant to the world outside of
the Church, it is done as a matter of responsible spiritual care, in order to
avoid the most dreadful consequence that a Christian would abandon His Lord’s
forgiveness in favor of defending and embracing his own sinful acts.

Tuesday, September 2, 2014

For the newspapers this week, I wrote a bit about the Eulogies and Christian Burial:

Q: Why do some churches always
include eulogies for the deceased, while others forbid eulogies during the
church service? What is the nature and
purpose of a Christian funeral?

A eulogy is commonly understood is a
speech or piece of writing that praises someone or something highly, typically
someone who has just died. In some traditions, this might be given by a pastor,
or perhaps the floor might be handed over to a close friend or relative to give
a positive description of the person’s life.
On some occasions, congregations even open the microphone to any person with
something to say about the deceased.

For many congregations, particularly among
individualistic Americans, this seems a natural thing to do during the services
following a friend or relative’s death, but for others, a eulogy would be extremely
foreign, and in fact, would be understood as a standing against what that
congregation believes and teaches. While
there are many factors which influence how a congregation or denomination approaches
the practice of giving eulogies, several seem to be most prevalent:

First, if a congregation understands
the Office of the Ministry to be something instituted by God to preach His Word
to the congregation and administer His Sacraments, it would be unheard of to
hand the pulpit over to a non-pastor in the midst of a service or to allow
non-ordained persons to speak authoritatively in the course of any service of
the church. This would immediately rule
out most eulogies.

Additionally, in congregations which
take seriously the responsibility to proclaim only pure teaching, it would be
unthinkable to allow speeches in front of the congregation which may include
elements contradictory to the congregation’s beliefs.

Similarly, a congregation’s understanding
of worship plays a large role in their approach to eulogies. Much like congregations who see worship as an
offering from the individual or congregation up toward God worship in one way,
while congregations which understand worship to be an occasion where God
delivers His grace down to the congregation, particularly those who focus that
delivery in the Word and Sacraments, worship in other ways; approaches to
eulogies follow a similar pattern.

If a congregation understands a
funeral’s purpose to be that of honoring the deceased and making the mourners
feel better, a eulogy is a natural element to include. However, if a congregation understands the
purpose of a funeral to be that of honoring God by proclaiming Christ and to
give the grieving hope in the face of death through the promise of
Resurrection, eulogies would be potentially difficult.

The most important factor, though,
seems to be the church’s understanding of salvation. The historic position of Christianity, and
that by which it stands out from the world’s other religions, is that God saves
by grace alone, through faith alone, because of Jesus alone, and that good
works play no role in this.
Historically, Christians even discourage the faithful from looking at
their good works as evidence of salvation.
In such a case, the giving of eulogies during the funeral service would
only confuse the communication of that belief, and if the eulogist is not
particularly careful, may even explicitly contradict that belief. Therefore congregations which this approach
to the idea of salvation by grace alone typically do not include eulogies.

In contrast, some denominations
believe that the Christian cooperates with God in saving themselves by doing
good deeds. Based on that understanding,
recounting the deceased person’s goodness at their funeral would fit what they
believe.

Even those which do not believe that
the Christian helps save themselves by good works often turn them back to their
deeds by other routes. For example, John
Calvin strenuously defended salvation by grace alone, but he directed believers
to look at their own good works as comfort and evidence that God had saved them. John Wesley looked at the Christian’s good
deeds even more favorably than Calvin, going so far as to assert that
Christians were capable of moral perfection in this life and relying heavily on
the Christian’s good works in their remaining saved after conversion. In these cases also, it makes sense that
eulogies would be part of a congregation’s funeral ceremony.

Like most questions about worship,
the inclusion or exclusion of eulogies comes down the connection between belief
and practice. Churches who believe in
certain ways will naturally lean toward eulogies, while churches which believe
in other ways will find them to be problematic and request that such
expressions be shared privately among the mourners or reserved for the
visitation or the funeral luncheon rather than included in the services of the
church.

Lutheranism is more than a cultural identity or a denominational label. In fact, this cultural and institutional baggage may be the primary obstacle in Lutheranism’s path.

To be a Lutheran is not dependent on a code of behavior or a set of common customs. Instead, to be a Lutheran is to receive Jesus in His Word, Body, and Blood for the forgiveness of sins in the Divine Service; and to be bearers of this pure Truth to a broken world corrupted with sin, death, and every lie of the devil and man’s own sinful heart.

While the false and misleading ideas of human religious invention are appealing to sin-blinded minds, they fail when exposed to the realities of life. It is tragic when souls are led to confusion and despair because of the false religious ideas with which they are surrounded. The Biblical doctrine taught by the Apostles and restored at the Reformation holds answers which are relevant regardless of time or place and offers assurance of forgiven sins and eternal life who all who believe its message.

I am a husband, a father, the pastor of St. John’s Lutheran Church (LCMS) in Burt, IA, and track chaplain at Algona Raceway.